Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
What kind of asinine logic is that? Someone is suddenly incapable of judging the value of a unit because they have access to another good unit? Explain yourself.
Why would you care about the worse units. The norm is the good units, not the bad ones. Heck even on this very forum, when I try to compare stuff to the stuff my army gets, am being told I shouldn't do that.
as for the eldar specific stuff, I find the idea of an eldar player saying his codex or units in it being sub par laughable. you can take 5-6 flyers and the worse unit in the eldar book, and you still are going to have an army working better then what the best version of an army out of my codex can do.
So yeah after all editions of being at least good and almost always OP at some time of an edition, eldar players would not be able to judge what good or bad means. It is only proven by months of eldar player mounting defence of how Inari were not OP, and at the same their rather hypocrite reaction to when IH got a better book.
Removed - Rule #1 please.
First, rule 1.
Secondly he has a point, as much as you hate to admit it.
Not saying the whole Mounting defense /hypocrite is the right assumption but there are dexes out there that can't even perform against obsolete codex units.
Nope. He doesn't have a point. In fact he responded to a point I didn't make and then decided to put words into the mouth of every Eldar player. This is one of the most common bs fallacies on DakkaDakka. If you "can" make a good list from your codex, your codex is amazing and thus you're seemingly not allowed to actually critique anything else in the book? That's a gak stupid argument.
Why respond to my post if he's responding to something I didn't say? Oh wait, that's right...Eldar have been good before so I'm not allowed to critique anything in the book. Fair point.
I agree, why is "the best unit the norm"? Some players play units they like lookwise, or lorewise or simply because they own them.
ohh agreed. if your codex has ONE good option, that's NOT a good codex, even if people are winning tournies by spamming that good option. A god codex is one that can perform well against most adversaries it deals with with a decent number of builds. not a codex that you can win by spamming literally ANYTHING, but a codex, that works well and whose parts interact together to form something that feels right.
if you have a single good choice that is used often in soup recpies that's not going to mean a whole lot for someone who really wants his entire ARMY to perform well. and it's the height of arrogance to say "ohh well you can ust win with soup" try telling a grey knight player his codex is "great" because "ohh well GMDKs are really strong and you can soup one of those with Imperium"
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
As a returning player, not sure if this is the right place for this, if not, apologies.
One of the armies im buying for my return is Eldar.
I understand that(from advice on here) that buying the Eldar Codex comes first before this book.
My concern is with the Eldar box, will a new Codex be appearing shortly do you think?
Also, im baffled re the Eldar boxes. I cant see howling Banshees at all on the GW site? Are we likely to be seeing new Aspect figures soon or is this a silly question?
One last thing, that huge Wraithknight figure, I cant see it on Battlescribe(new to BS too). Is it on there and how many points? It might be in the codex I guess, but thats in the post to me so no idea.
Thanks and apologies if this is nothing to do with Phoenix Rising(think its an eldar themed book though?)
VAYASEN wrote: As a returning player, not sure if this is the right place for this, if not, apologies.
One of the armies im buying for my return is Eldar.
I understand that(from advice on here) that buying the Eldar Codex comes first before this book.
My concern is with the Eldar box, will a new Codex be appearing shortly do you think?
Also, im baffled re the Eldar boxes. I cant see howling Banshees at all on the GW site? Are we likely to be seeing new Aspect figures soon or is this a silly question?
One last thing, that huge Wraithknight figure, I cant see it on Battlescribe(new to BS too). Is it on there and how many points? It might be in the codex I guess, but thats in the post to me so no idea.
Thanks and apologies if this is nothing to do with Phoenix Rising(think its an eldar themed book though?)
I don`t think new Aeldar codex will appear soon, but you can save some money and get cheaper used copy or use other means.
Aeldar starting box is terrible and we have to wait until they release plastic banshees in their own kit.
For now i don`t think we will see new aspect in foreseeable feature.
Wraithknight can be put only in certain detachments, by memory in supreme command, super heavy auxiliary detachment and super heavy detachment.
Check BS for the points, since you can change the wargear.
What kind of asinine logic is that? Someone is suddenly incapable of judging the value of a unit because they have access to another good unit? Explain yourself.
Why would you care about the worse units. The norm is the good units, not the bad ones. Heck even on this very forum, when I try to compare stuff to the stuff my army gets, am being told I shouldn't do that.
as for the eldar specific stuff, I find the idea of an eldar player saying his codex or units in it being sub par laughable. you can take 5-6 flyers and the worse unit in the eldar book, and you still are going to have an army working better then what the best version of an army out of my codex can do.
So yeah after all editions of being at least good and almost always OP at some time of an edition, eldar players would not be able to judge what good or bad means. It is only proven by months of eldar player mounting defence of how Inari were not OP, and at the same their rather hypocrite reaction to when IH got a better book.
Removed - Rule #1 please.
First, rule 1.
Secondly he has a point, as much as you hate to admit it.
Not saying the whole Mounting defense /hypocrite is the right assumption but there are dexes out there that can't even perform against obsolete codex units.
Nope. He doesn't have a point. In fact he responded to a point I didn't make and then decided to put words into the mouth of every Eldar player. This is one of the most common bs fallacies on DakkaDakka. If you "can" make a good list from your codex, your codex is amazing and thus you're seemingly not allowed to actually critique anything else in the book? That's a gak stupid argument.
Why respond to my post if he's responding to something I didn't say? Oh wait, that's right...Eldar have been good before so I'm not allowed to critique anything in the book. Fair point.
I agree, why is "the best unit the norm"? Some players play units they like lookwise, or lorewise or simply because they own them.
ohh agreed. if your codex has ONE good option, that's NOT a good codex, even if people are winning tournies by spamming that good option. A god codex is one that can perform well against most adversaries it deals with with a decent number of builds. not a codex that you can win by spamming literally ANYTHING, but a codex, that works well and whose parts interact together to form something that feels right.
if you have a single good choice that is used often in soup recpies that's not going to mean a whole lot for someone who really wants his entire ARMY to perform well. and it's the height of arrogance to say "ohh well you can ust win with soup" try telling a grey knight player his codex is "great" because "ohh well GMDKs are really strong and you can soup one of those with Imperium"
The issue is, that for that to be workable, the dexes would need to be on par, they are not and we see this now. (infact GW doesn't even attempt to put them on equal footing see quality PA and CSM 2.0 compared too Supplements for marines +C:SM 2.0 )
What looks from an Eldar view subpar, is decidedly not subpar for other dexes (especially out of the viewpoint of GK, FW indexes etc.) Which are even further behind the Release cycle. Sub par is relative to what's available. (including Soup)
In a way most of these issues stem from the fact that GW does not really balance (even CA is questionable).Aswell as stating that 40 k is in a good place because most factions show up competitively.
Heck, Codex CSM 2.0 could be renamed in codex Slaaneshalphaobliterterminator with some purge seasoning, which refers to the 2 common soup content units and traits and marks.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
VAYASEN wrote: As a returning player, not sure if this is the right place for this, if not, apologies.
One of the armies im buying for my return is Eldar.
I understand that(from advice on here) that buying the Eldar Codex comes first before this book.
My concern is with the Eldar box, will a new Codex be appearing shortly do you think?
Also, im baffled re the Eldar boxes. I cant see howling Banshees at all on the GW site? Are we likely to be seeing new Aspect figures soon or is this a silly question?
One last thing, that huge Wraithknight figure, I cant see it on Battlescribe(new to BS too). Is it on there and how many points? It might be in the codex I guess, but thats in the post to me so no idea.
Thanks and apologies if this is nothing to do with Phoenix Rising(think its an eldar themed book though?)
Well, this is definitely not the right place for tactical advice.
Please go to the tactical thread at this board.
Former moderator 40kOnline
Lanchester's square law - please obey in list building!
Illumini: "And thank you for not finishing your post with a "" I'm sorry, but after 7200 's that has to be the most annoying sign-off ever."
What kind of asinine logic is that? Someone is suddenly incapable of judging the value of a unit because they have access to another good unit? Explain yourself.
Why would you care about the worse units. The norm is the good units, not the bad ones. Heck even on this very forum, when I try to compare stuff to the stuff my army gets, am being told I shouldn't do that.
as for the eldar specific stuff, I find the idea of an eldar player saying his codex or units in it being sub par laughable. you can take 5-6 flyers and the worse unit in the eldar book, and you still are going to have an army working better then what the best version of an army out of my codex can do.
So yeah after all editions of being at least good and almost always OP at some time of an edition, eldar players would not be able to judge what good or bad means. It is only proven by months of eldar player mounting defence of how Inari were not OP, and at the same their rather hypocrite reaction to when IH got a better book.
Removed - Rule #1 please.
First, rule 1.
Secondly he has a point, as much as you hate to admit it.
Not saying the whole Mounting defense /hypocrite is the right assumption but there are dexes out there that can't even perform against obsolete codex units.
Nope. He doesn't have a point. In fact he responded to a point I didn't make and then decided to put words into the mouth of every Eldar player. This is one of the most common bs fallacies on DakkaDakka. If you "can" make a good list from your codex, your codex is amazing and thus you're seemingly not allowed to actually critique anything else in the book? That's a gak stupid argument.
Why respond to my post if he's responding to something I didn't say? Oh wait, that's right...Eldar have been good before so I'm not allowed to critique anything in the book. Fair point.
I agree, why is "the best unit the norm"? Some players play units they like lookwise, or lorewise or simply because they own them.
ohh agreed. if your codex has ONE good option, that's NOT a good codex, even if people are winning tournies by spamming that good option. A god codex is one that can perform well against most adversaries it deals with with a decent number of builds. not a codex that you can win by spamming literally ANYTHING, but a codex, that works well and whose parts interact together to form something that feels right.
if you have a single good choice that is used often in soup recpies that's not going to mean a whole lot for someone who really wants his entire ARMY to perform well. and it's the height of arrogance to say "ohh well you can ust win with soup" try telling a grey knight player his codex is "great" because "ohh well GMDKs are really strong and you can soup one of those with Imperium"
The issue is, that for that to be workable, the dexes would need to be on par, they are not and we see this now. (infact GW doesn't even attempt to put them on equal footing see quality PA and CSM 2.0 compared too Supplements for marines +C:SM 2.0 )
What looks from an Eldar view subpar, is decidedly not subpar for other dexes (especially out of the viewpoint of GK, FW indexes etc.) Which are even further behind the Release cycle. Sub par is relative to what's available. (including Soup)
In a way most of these issues stem from the fact that GW does not really balance (even CA is questionable).Aswell as stating that 40 k is in a good place because most factions show up competitively.
Heck, Codex CSM 2.0 could be renamed in codex Slaaneshalphaobliterterminator with some purge seasoning, which refers to the 2 common soup content units and traits and marks.
This is not directed at you specifically, but this question came to my mind in so many dicussions: Don't you guys play against your friends? Do you only do pick up games at stores? Because this works just perfectly fine in a group of friends, although the codices are not on par with each other. In a setting where you speak before the game and more importantly after the game, what was fun, what wasn't, etc. And I assure yoo, that your friend will feel no pleassure in just stomping your army to the ground every single time, he will try different things, things he might think are fluffy, cool or something similar. And the games will become more balanced...I'm not saying 50/50 balanced, but at least to a degree where you have fun.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/11 11:12:58
Empty your mind, be formless, shapeless — like soup. Now you put soup in a cup, it becomes the cup; You put soup into a bottle it becomes the bottle; You put it in a teapot it becomes the teapot. Now soup can flow or it can crash. Be soup, my friend.
What kind of asinine logic is that? Someone is suddenly incapable of judging the value of a unit because they have access to another good unit? Explain yourself.
Why would you care about the worse units. The norm is the good units, not the bad ones. Heck even on this very forum, when I try to compare stuff to the stuff my army gets, am being told I shouldn't do that.
as for the eldar specific stuff, I find the idea of an eldar player saying his codex or units in it being sub par laughable. you can take 5-6 flyers and the worse unit in the eldar book, and you still are going to have an army working better then what the best version of an army out of my codex can do.
So yeah after all editions of being at least good and almost always OP at some time of an edition, eldar players would not be able to judge what good or bad means. It is only proven by months of eldar player mounting defence of how Inari were not OP, and at the same their rather hypocrite reaction to when IH got a better book.
Removed - Rule #1 please.
First, rule 1.
Secondly he has a point, as much as you hate to admit it.
Not saying the whole Mounting defense /hypocrite is the right assumption but there are dexes out there that can't even perform against obsolete codex units.
Nope. He doesn't have a point. In fact he responded to a point I didn't make and then decided to put words into the mouth of every Eldar player. This is one of the most common bs fallacies on DakkaDakka. If you "can" make a good list from your codex, your codex is amazing and thus you're seemingly not allowed to actually critique anything else in the book? That's a gak stupid argument.
Why respond to my post if he's responding to something I didn't say? Oh wait, that's right...Eldar have been good before so I'm not allowed to critique anything in the book. Fair point.
I agree, why is "the best unit the norm"? Some players play units they like lookwise, or lorewise or simply because they own them.
ohh agreed. if your codex has ONE good option, that's NOT a good codex, even if people are winning tournies by spamming that good option. A god codex is one that can perform well against most adversaries it deals with with a decent number of builds. not a codex that you can win by spamming literally ANYTHING, but a codex, that works well and whose parts interact together to form something that feels right.
if you have a single good choice that is used often in soup recpies that's not going to mean a whole lot for someone who really wants his entire ARMY to perform well. and it's the height of arrogance to say "ohh well you can ust win with soup" try telling a grey knight player his codex is "great" because "ohh well GMDKs are really strong and you can soup one of those with Imperium"
The issue is, that for that to be workable, the dexes would need to be on par, they are not and we see this now. (infact GW doesn't even attempt to put them on equal footing see quality PA and CSM 2.0 compared too Supplements for marines +C:SM 2.0 )
What looks from an Eldar view subpar, is decidedly not subpar for other dexes (especially out of the viewpoint of GK, FW indexes etc.) Which are even further behind the Release cycle. Sub par is relative to what's available. (including Soup)
In a way most of these issues stem from the fact that GW does not really balance (even CA is questionable).Aswell as stating that 40 k is in a good place because most factions show up competitively.
Heck, Codex CSM 2.0 could be renamed in codex Slaaneshalphaobliterterminator with some purge seasoning, which refers to the 2 common soup content units and traits and marks.
don't disagree. a codex to be good must be internally AND externally balanced... now that said, a codex like that likely would be dismissed as "sucking" by the useal suspects here as it'd not have a OP unit they could spam until the cows came home to win tournies.
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
VAYASEN wrote: As a returning player, not sure if this is the right place for this, if not, apologies.
One of the armies im buying for my return is Eldar.
I understand that(from advice on here) that buying the Eldar Codex comes first before this book.
My concern is with the Eldar box, will a new Codex be appearing shortly do you think?
Also, im baffled re the Eldar boxes. I cant see howling Banshees at all on the GW site? Are we likely to be seeing new Aspect figures soon or is this a silly question?
One last thing, that huge Wraithknight figure, I cant see it on Battlescribe(new to BS too). Is it on there and how many points? It might be in the codex I guess, but thats in the post to me so no idea.
Thanks and apologies if this is nothing to do with Phoenix Rising(think its an eldar themed book though?)
Well, this is definitely not the right place for tactical advice.
Please go to the tactical thread at this board.
Hi
I wasnt really asking any tactical advice? Just wondered as a new player if this is the forerunner to new eldar stuff(before I went out and bought things).
I think its probbably easy to forget how overwhelming things are for a returning player where everything seems new(even as somebody who has followed the lore for over 30 years). Really didnt want to buy new eldar Codex/figures if people were saying new stuff was coming shortly(but it seems like it isnt).
VAYASEN wrote: As a returning player, not sure if this is the right place for this, if not, apologies.
One of the armies im buying for my return is Eldar.
I understand that(from advice on here) that buying the Eldar Codex comes first before this book.
My concern is with the Eldar box, will a new Codex be appearing shortly do you think?
Also, im baffled re the Eldar boxes. I cant see howling Banshees at all on the GW site? Are we likely to be seeing new Aspect figures soon or is this a silly question?
One last thing, that huge Wraithknight figure, I cant see it on Battlescribe(new to BS too). Is it on there and how many points? It might be in the codex I guess, but thats in the post to me so no idea.
Thanks and apologies if this is nothing to do with Phoenix Rising(think its an eldar themed book though?)
Well, this is definitely not the right place for tactical advice.
Please go to the tactical thread at this board.
Hi
I wasnt really asking any tactical advice? Just wondered as a new player if this is the forerunner to new eldar stuff(before I went out and bought things).
I think its probbably easy to forget how overwhelming things are for a returning player where everything seems new(even as somebody who has followed the lore for over 30 years). Really didnt want to buy new eldar Codex/figures if people were saying new stuff was coming shortly(but it seems like it isnt).
GW tends not to announce this stuff ahead of time. that said generally new units in a boxed set, are often harbringers of a new release wave/codex due out later, but even if thats the case codex craftworld eldar could not be due out for a year. if you wanna leap in... snag the codex and jump on in/
CWE could get a new codex in a few months, or it might never happen.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/11 12:36:59
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
This is not directed at you specifically, but this question came to my mind in so many dicussions: Don't you guys play against your friends? Do you only do pick up games at stores? Because this works just perfectly fine in a group of friends, although the codices are not on par with each other. In a setting where you speak before the game and more importantly after the game, what was fun, what wasn't, etc. And I assure yoo, that your friend will feel no pleassure in just stomping your army to the ground every single time, he will try different things, things he might think are fluffy, cool or something similar. And the games will become more balanced...I'm not saying 50/50 balanced, but at least to a degree where you have fun.
I am lucky in sofar that i have a regular group of friends to play with which is similarly inclined to tone down or welocme a theme list night aswell as competitive, but the issues with some dexes and indexes are so big that even we are at a point were we find it questionable that we need to hand out a 10%-20% pts handicap to certain armies to even have an attempt at a somwhat balanced match, even with theme armies.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
don't disagree. a codex to be good must be internally AND externally balanced... now that said, a codex like that likely would be dismissed as "sucking" by the useal suspects here as it'd not have a OP unit they could spam until the cows came home to win tournies.
it's also those that state that x faction is good or in a good place because they show up in x as a soup component.
Because of course CSM 2.0 are great, yet you see 2-3 units spammed and the rest is taken from other chaos armies.
And of those that are taken all these are 1-2 traits maybee and 1 mark really.
Frankly it's the contrary, such a dex is badly balanced, with few outliers the army needs to rely on to remain relevant.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/11 13:03:13
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Spoletta wrote: I know that this is going to throw a mess in here, but reading text dramas is the only purpose of this forum, so i will do it anyway.
In the last games of Heat4 yesterday, even with 9 IF 6 IH and 6 UM partecipating, the top table was drukhary vs drukhary + harleys.
Rememember that GW heats are the most competitive tournaments around using the standard ruleset (CA18 at 1750), so they are the most important indicators on the state of the game balance wise.
After seeing that game, i'm not that angry that SM got a huge buff and aeldari a quite mild one...
What a horrible misrepresentation. The top tables have players randomly drawn against each other that have won the same number of games, and Heat 4 was dominated by Space Marines, as the results prove.
This is not directed at you specifically, but this question came to my mind in so many dicussions: Don't you guys play against your friends? Do you only do pick up games at stores? Because this works just perfectly fine in a group of friends, although the codices are not on par with each other. In a setting where you speak before the game and more importantly after the game, what was fun, what wasn't, etc. And I assure yoo, that your friend will feel no pleassure in just stomping your army to the ground every single time, he will try different things, things he might think are fluffy, cool or something similar. And the games will become more balanced...I'm not saying 50/50 balanced, but at least to a degree where you have fun.
My expiriance is different, people will not go one and buy a second army to just maybe give you a better chance at having fun. At best they will maybe expect that you buy a new good army or good units, and they will not wait for you for sure. I have seen a few people started the game with 1000pts, and couldn't move on to 2000pts when they friends did. Very soon they had no one to play with, because no one wanted to play 1000pts games, when they had a whole store of opponents who had 2000pts armies.
Plus am not sure what speaking is suppose to fix. I have 2000pts, my opponent has 2000pts, Lets say my army is a lot better then his, what am I suppose to do about it? the games are 2000pts, am I suppose to play to lose, because that is even worse then just beating someone up?
Also this fixs nothing for people that have no friends.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
Spoletta wrote: I know that this is going to throw a mess in here, but reading text dramas is the only purpose of this forum, so i will do it anyway.
In the last games of Heat4 yesterday, even with 9 IF 6 IH and 6 UM partecipating, the top table was drukhary vs drukhary + harleys.
Rememember that GW heats are the most competitive tournaments around using the standard ruleset (CA18 at 1750), so they are the most important indicators on the state of the game balance wise.
After seeing that game, i'm not that angry that SM got a huge buff and aeldari a quite mild one...
What a horrible misrepresentation. The top tables have players randomly drawn against each other that have won the same number of games, and Heat 4 was dominated by Space Marines, as the results prove.
This is not directed at you specifically, but this question came to my mind in so many dicussions: Don't you guys play against your friends? Do you only do pick up games at stores? Because this works just perfectly fine in a group of friends, although the codices are not on par with each other. In a setting where you speak before the game and more importantly after the game, what was fun, what wasn't, etc. And I assure yoo, that your friend will feel no pleassure in just stomping your army to the ground every single time, he will try different things, things he might think are fluffy, cool or something similar. And the games will become more balanced...I'm not saying 50/50 balanced, but at least to a degree where you have fun.
My expiriance is different, people will not go one and buy a second army to just maybe give you a better chance at having fun. At best they will maybe expect that you buy a new good army or good units, and they will not wait for you for sure. I have seen a few people started the game with 1000pts, and couldn't move on to 2000pts when they friends did. Very soon they had no one to play with, because no one wanted to play 1000pts games, when they had a whole store of opponents who had 2000pts armies.
Plus am not sure what speaking is suppose to fix. I have 2000pts, my opponent has 2000pts, Lets say my army is a lot better then his, what am I suppose to do about it? the games are 2000pts, am I suppose to play to lose, because that is even worse then just beating someone up?
Also this fixs nothing for people that have no friends.
It's not about buying a new army. if two guys both have 2000 points, you could play 1500 points and he'll exclude his most powerfull units, or you guys put more terrain in your deployment zone, play with objectives and place more in your direct vicinity. Heck you could even go for 2000 points vs 1500.
I get that this would be hard if you don't know the guy, but if you run into him for the 5th time at your store and ask him if you could after 4 devastating losses include some more points or do something I said above, there are good chances that he'll agree.
DISCLAIMER: I'm not saying that it would be much easier if all codices would be more balanced but apart from writing emails to GW (what we actually all should do) we can't change the way they write the rules. So I always try to make the best out of it, to quote "grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, And wisdom to know the difference."
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/11 13:22:53
Empty your mind, be formless, shapeless — like soup. Now you put soup in a cup, it becomes the cup; You put soup into a bottle it becomes the bottle; You put it in a teapot it becomes the teapot. Now soup can flow or it can crash. Be soup, my friend.
Well I go to school with a lot of the people from the store, they convinced me start w40k. Am not sure how that much I know them, but I know them enough, to know that this would not fly.
No one here would play a 1500pts vs 2000pts game, maybe if it was against the store owners sons or kids on of the regulars, but I can't imagine why they wouldn't use 2000pts armies, as their dads clearly have those.
I played a 1700pts vs 2000 for a long time, because I didn't have enough models, but that is a rather special case. Plus how would people divide it, with how optimised the armies are, people wouldn't be able to fullfill the detachment pre sets if they had to take 500pts less. would be too much work, for a person who could just play someone else with a 2000pts army and no such problems.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
Spoletta wrote: I know that this is going to throw a mess in here, but reading text dramas is the only purpose of this forum, so i will do it anyway.
In the last games of Heat4 yesterday, even with 9 IF 6 IH and 6 UM partecipating, the top table was drukhary vs drukhary + harleys.
Rememember that GW heats are the most competitive tournaments around using the standard ruleset (CA18 at 1750), so they are the most important indicators on the state of the game balance wise.
After seeing that game, i'm not that angry that SM got a huge buff and aeldari a quite mild one...
I'd argue against 1750 and CA missions being the defacto for game health, but those results are too overwhelming for any facet of the game.
They list points killed on the results page, which is a little weird that they tracked that. It seems like the top two IF players had everyone concede against them as they got max points killed.
This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2019/11/11 13:43:35
Spoletta wrote: I know that this is going to throw a mess in here, but reading text dramas is the only purpose of this forum, so i will do it anyway.
In the last games of Heat4 yesterday, even with 9 IF 6 IH and 6 UM partecipating, the top table was drukhary vs drukhary + harleys.
Rememember that GW heats are the most competitive tournaments around using the standard ruleset (CA18 at 1750), so they are the most important indicators on the state of the game balance wise.
After seeing that game, i'm not that angry that SM got a huge buff and aeldari a quite mild one...
I'd argue against 1750 and CA missions being the defacto for game health, but those results are too overwhelming for any facet of the game.
They list points killed on the results page, which is a little weird that they tracked that. It seems like the top two IF players had everyone concede against them as they got max points killed.
It's the format they have in mind when making changes at the very least, so if one wants to talk about GW incompetency , it should be done with results obtained with this rule package.
By the way, where is the result page? I didn't find it, i was only following the streaming.
Edit: Found it, and yes, we clearly have an IF problem.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/11 14:07:01
It's the format they have in mind when making changes at the very least, so if one wants to talk about GW incompetency , it should be done with results obtained with this rule package.
By the way, where is the result page? I didn't find it, i was only following the streaming.
Again, I would argue that this format is what they use to consider changes when all the FAQs wait for results from ITC style tournaments before releasing them and the playtesters are mostly ITC based (not that GW takes all their feedback).
It's the format they have in mind when making changes at the very least, so if one wants to talk about GW incompetency , it should be done with results obtained with this rule package.
By the way, where is the result page? I didn't find it, i was only following the streaming.
Again, I would argue that this format is what they use to consider changes when all the FAQs wait for results from ITC style tournaments before releasing them and the playtesters are mostly ITC based (not that GW takes all their feedback).
First: wow that is a lot of IF.
Secondly: Why should GW even take ITC feedback, excuse me, but ITC feedback is comparatively worthless to this closer sample.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Secondly: Why should GW even take ITC feedback, excuse me, but ITC feedback is comparatively worthless to this closer sample.
Exactly why is ITC feedback worthless?
Because ITC doesn't reflect the base game anymore due to modification.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Secondly: Why should GW even take ITC feedback, excuse me, but ITC feedback is comparatively worthless to this closer sample.
Exactly why is ITC feedback worthless?
Because ITC doesn't reflect the base game anymore due to modification.
And if GW incorporated the tiny number of changes ITC has? What then?
Do you realize that ITC has influenced changes on GW missions? Did you notice these?
No Prisoners: At the end of each battle round,
a player scores 1 victory point if more units
from their opponent’s army were destroyed
during that battle round than from their
own army.
First Strike: You score 1 victory point if
any units from your opponent’s army were
destroyed during the first battle round.
Those are ITC style rules. Did you notice ITC incorporating full deploy? As time marches on ITC and GW work together to build better missions. GW isn't going to fully incorporate all of ITC, because it is a more complex competitive mission set.that doesn't fit well within GW's skill set -- ITC can react to things far more quickly like keeping Repulsors from floating on tiny pieces of ruins.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/11 14:25:47
Secondly: Why should GW even take ITC feedback, excuse me, but ITC feedback is comparatively worthless to this closer sample.
Exactly why is ITC feedback worthless?
Because ITC doesn't reflect the base game anymore due to modification.
And if GW incorporated the tiny number of changes ITC has? What then?
Do you realize that ITC has influenced changes on GW missions? Did you notice these?
No Prisoners: At the end of each battle round,
a player scores 1 victory point if more units
from their opponent’s army were destroyed
during that battle round than from their
own army.
First Strike: You score 1 victory point if
any units from your opponent’s army were
destroyed during the first battle round.
Those are ITC style rules. Did you notice ITC incorporating full deploy? As time marches on ITC and GW work together to build better missions. GW isn't going to fully incorporate all of ITC, because it is a more complex competitive mission set.that doesn't fit well within GW's skill set -- ITC can react to things far more quickly like keeping Repulsors from floating on tiny pieces of ruins.
First: Stop assuming i am just against ITC rules.
Secondly: You cna debate all you want about the changes or if they are good or not. (i tend to regard ITC as to kill heavy focussed but that's me)
Thirdly: ITC has influenced GW mainline yes, is the outcome good though? Again Debatable.
Fourth: Yes i did, yes i feel they do nothing for certain factions and are also laughable in the context of deepth missions should offer in a wargame but that is again my opinion. And is debatable again.
Fifth: Your last paragraph assumes that GW can't do something that a bunch of tourney people can, even tough GW has more ressources then them by miles. It is a cheap crop out and to be regarded as such. Also GW could further avoid your exemple by finnaly beeing less shoddy about their rulewriting but considering that the baseline rules for terrain in the base rulebook are now what 3 sites?
So stop belitteling people that do not agree with your gospel that ITC is great and all. it has just as many issues as other formats.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Looking at the results there, I didn't realise how bad it had gotten. What makes it more worrisome is that we know the upcoming Chapter Approved was made before these results were seen.
Secondly: You cna debate all you want about the changes or if they are good or not. (i tend to regard ITC as to kill heavy focussed but that's me)
Thirdly: ITC has influenced GW mainline yes, is the outcome good though? Again Debatable.
Fourth: Yes i did, yes i feel they do nothing for certain factions and are also laughable in the context of deepth missions should offer in a wargame but that is again my opinion. And is debatable again.
Fifth: Your last paragraph assumes that GW can't do something that a bunch of tourney people can, even tough GW has more ressources then them by miles. It is a cheap crop out and to be regarded as such. Also GW could further avoid your exemple by finnaly beeing less shoddy about their rulewriting but considering that the baseline rules for terrain in the base rulebook are now what 3 sites?
So stop belitteling people that do not agree with your gospel that ITC is great and all. it has just as many issues as other formats.
How exactly have I belittled you?
I just don't see the line you've drawn in the sand as useful to competitive gaming. I'm accepting of this tournament as a piece of the puzzle. You should likewise try to consider ITC as evidence of what changes in the system are useful or necessary. Secondaries can lead to clever play -- as an example a daemon soup list with Magnus, 3 PBCs, and plaguebearers opted to deepstrike all his infantry, because the IH player chose objectives that focused on killing those weaker models. What was the end result? The Magnus list won 26 to 19, because he removed the opponent's ability to kill, kill more, and score secondaries as IH often lacks shooting capable of dealing with T8.
If we asked the community if they thought a list with Magnus could beat IH what do you think the response would be?
GW has more resources and they're very clearly crammed and don't have the focus they need for this right now.
Secondly: You cna debate all you want about the changes or if they are good or not. (i tend to regard ITC as to kill heavy focussed but that's me)
Thirdly: ITC has influenced GW mainline yes, is the outcome good though? Again Debatable.
Fourth: Yes i did, yes i feel they do nothing for certain factions and are also laughable in the context of deepth missions should offer in a wargame but that is again my opinion. And is debatable again.
Fifth: Your last paragraph assumes that GW can't do something that a bunch of tourney people can, even tough GW has more ressources then them by miles. It is a cheap crop out and to be regarded as such. Also GW could further avoid your exemple by finnaly beeing less shoddy about their rulewriting but considering that the baseline rules for terrain in the base rulebook are now what 3 sites?
So stop belitteling people that do not agree with your gospel that ITC is great and all. it has just as many issues as other formats.
How exactly have I belittled you?
Your intonation was belitteling, and your behaviour everytime someone brings up that ITC is not baseline 40k and should not be extrapolated just willy nilly is of course colouring my impression of your statement. If i am wrong in that then i beg your pardon.
I just don't see the line you've drawn in the sand as useful to competitive gaming. I'm accepting of this tournament as a piece of the puzzle. You should likewise try to consider ITC as evidence of what changes in the system are useful or necessary. Secondaries can lead to clever play -- as an example a daemon soup list with Magnus, 3 PBCs, and plaguebearers opted to deepstrike all his infantry, because the IH player chose objectives that focused on killing those weaker models. What was the end result? The Magnus list won 26 to 19, because he removed the opponent's ability to kill, kill more, and score secondaries as IH often lacks shooting capable of dealing with T8.
If we asked the community if they thought a list with Magnus could beat IH what do you think the response would be?
GW has more resources and they're very clearly crammed and don't have the focus they need for this right now.
Nope, it is probable the closest to mainline 40k you see, and you regard it as a piece, that says enough imo.
Secondly: ITC changes are only usefull for the ITC people themselves trying to establish a world wide competitive scene. that's saying like FIFA is usefull for football.
Spoiler:
And a more selfserving corrupt bunch of morons you will rarely find beyond parlamentary cleptocracies, FIFA that is
Further who made you the arbitrator of what is deemed to be usefull or necessary for the hobby ruleset?
See that's the issue. And whilest yes my initial statement is of course hyperbolic, it also contains the point rather well. ITC is not GW, Claims to play competitively (with a modified ruleset that is highly debatable) and only selfserving.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/11 15:20:15
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Your intonation was belitteling, and your behaviour everytime someone brings up that ITC is not baseline 40k and should not be extrapolated just willy nilly is of course colouring my impression of your statement. If i am wrong in that then i beg your pardon.
I don't feel like it was. Would you help me identify what things sounded harsh to you (honestly)? If the way I write it causing friction I'd like to change it. I do realize I get snippy when I feel like I'm being personally attacked, which is too often, but I'd like to not start conversations off on the wrong foot.
Nope, it is probable the closest to mainline 40k you see, and you regard it as a piece, that says enough imo.
No, I appreciate that both ends need to be useful and not to make mainline suffer, because "ITC is ok". I think mainline 40K would at least benefit from the terrain tweaks though. The ITC missions have a lot to offer, but I just don't see GW incorporating those, because their focus is always split between narrative and competitive and it's a pretty complex set of rules to give to all the 40K people.
And if GW incorporated the tiny number of changes ITC has? What then?
Do you realize that ITC has influenced changes on GW missions? Did you notice these?
These come off from a high horse, like "Do you have even any clue?"
Atleast imo.
As for terrain, honestly everything is better then baseline terrain rules from GW beyond blanket no terrain. So ofcourse itc terrain tweaks are superior.
because their focus is always split between narrative and competitive
And lastly there's the issue, GW doesn't need 2 pts system. GW should publish one tight ruleset. And then add in the scenarios suggesstions for Narrative and comptetive.
There is no need for GW publishing whole narrative campaigns because GW narrative ones are, let's be blunt, quite mediocre at best.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
" I'm sorry, but after 7200 's that has to be the most annoying sign-off ever." 
